[Devel] Why use FAKEGATEWAY{,NET} instead of default dev venet0?

[Peter Volkov]

В Срд, 15/10/2008 в 19:46 +0400, Denis V. Lunev пишет:
> On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 14:15 +0400, Peter Volkov wrote:
> > В Втр, 14/10/2008 в 11:51 +0400, Denis V. Lunev пишет:
> > > On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 13:08 +0400, Peter Volkov wrote:
> > > > venet0 is peer-to-peer device. Why openvz scripts
> > > > set some $FAKEGATEWAYNET network on p2p device and then put nonexistent
> > > > $FAKEGATEWAY as a gateway there? Seems that it's much more simple and
> > > > clean way to setup networking is:
> > > > 
> > > > # route add default dev venet0
> > > > or 
> > > > # ip route add default dev venet0
> > > > 
> > > > Are there any drawbacks of this solution? I'm going to modify
> > > > gentoo-{add,del}_ip.sh scripts but is it good idea?

> If you want to speed-up vzctl change - bugzilla entry would be of great help.

Actually I've already did that:

http://bugzilla.openvz.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1046

That patch changes behavior for Gentoo scripts only, but possibly bug
could be extended to other systems too. I even thought that you noticed
my mail after reading that bug...

-- 
Peter.